Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

That will happen pretty definitely.. why should a developer create games for an outdated console (even if it has millions of users)?

Maybe because they have millions of users? Not to mention much lower development costs.

Yes but a state of the art game takes years to develop.. years during which most people will buy the new console and after 2-3 years of development you may find your playerbase for the old console has eroded and half or more of the people have switched to the new one.

Current games in development won't get cancelled but once the PS4/XBox 720 are released later in the year i guess most developers will switch exclusively to the new machine. It's just not profitable in the long run to develop for a soon (in financial/development terms) to be outdated/outclassed/unsupported/not sold in major stores console.

Would you as the CEO of a videogame corporation approve a PS3 game now knowing that in about half a year there will be a new, far more powerful machine available?

You're right that no new AAA games will start development after the PS4 is out, but I would expect lower to mid tier gaming to continue for a few years. Sega was still publishing new Dreamcast games up until 2006. Good ones too.

You're right that no new AAA games will start development after the PS4 is out, but I would expect lower to mid tier gaming to continue for a few years. Sega was still publishing new Dreamcast games up until 2006. Good ones too.

Sega manufactured games that late, but they didn't publish them. (Admittedly, they did continue publishing DC games - only in Japan - through 2004, which is still quite a while after the system was retired. The fact that most of those were easy ports from Sega's Dreamcast-plus-RAM arcade hardware is what made that happen, though; something which doesn't exist for PS3 or 360.)

Sega manufactured games that late, but they didn't publish them. (Admittedly, they did continue publishing DC games - only in Japan - through 2004, which is still quite a while after the system was retired. The fact that most of those were easy ports from Sega's Dreamcast-plus-RAM arcade hardware is what made that happen, though; something which doesn't exist for PS3 or 360.)

According to Wikipedia, which does cite a source, the last game that Sega published for the Dreamcast was in 2007.

Wikipedia wrote:

The last Dreamcast games published by Sega of Japan were the 2007 releases Trigger Heart Exelica and Karous.[5] Ending 9 years after the release of the console.

If you want to get even crazier, Square Soft is releasing a Final Fantasy XI expansion pack later next month for the Playstation 2. No, that's not a typo. It's coming out for other systems too and it is just an expansion pack, but still that's quite impressive support.

According to Wikipedia, which does cite a source, the last game that Sega published for the Dreamcast was in 2007.

Wikipedia wrote:

The last Dreamcast games published by Sega of Japan were the 2007 releases Trigger Heart Exelica and Karous.[5] Ending 9 years after the release of the console.

Ah. The last sentence of the prior paragraph contradicts that:

Wikipedia wrote:

Many of the games were initially developed for Sega's NAOMI arcade hardware, including Sega's final first-party Dreamcast game, Sonic Team's Puyo Puyo Fever, released on February 24, 2004.

(Which cites the same source as your quote!) And if you go to the pages for those individual games (Exelica and Karous), Sega isn't listed as the publisher of the Dreamcast version.

I wish I understood Japanese so I could read the source link and see whether that was a list of all licensed releases, or just those specifically published by Sega. I'm inclined to believe that the "published" with regards to the 2007 was a mistake (Sega would've still licensed & manufactured the games; they simply weren't the publisher), but it's hard to tell for sure.

Kelthaz wrote:

If you want to get even crazier, Square Soft is releasing a Final Fantasy XI expansion pack later next month for the Playstation 2. No, that's not a typo. It's coming out for other systems too and it is just an expansion pack, but still that's quite impressive support.

True. Though given how my coworkers who played FF11 have railed about how the need to keep PS2 compatibility has caused other issues, I'm not sure that was the best move for players on all platforms as a whole.

Would you as the CEO of a videogame corporation approve a PS3 game now knowing that in about half a year there will be a new, far more powerful machine available?

I would. That new powerful machine is only going to have a potential 10-20 million customers as opposed to 75+ million for the current gen systems. If anything I'd develop a new game for PS3/Xbox and just gussy it up to 1080P and 3D or whatever for the next gen systems. Usually we have at least two years of games still being released for a generation after the next gen starts.

I would. That new powerful machine is only going to have a potential 10-20 million customers as opposed to 75+ million for the current gen systems. If anything I'd develop a new game for PS3/Xbox and just gussy it up to 1080P and 3D or whatever for the next gen systems. Usually we have at least two years of games still being released for a generation after the next gen starts.

Your "whatever" shows me that you have little understanding of programming at all and equally little understanding of the differences between the machines.

Especially the case with Playstation 3 and 4 is different as both machines run on totally different architectures meaning that basically you need to program them differently and it's not a little tweak like you assume like adding a high resolution pack.

Yes.. initially the customer base for next gen machines will naturally be smaller and there will still be games for the old console for years to come but i guess given the need for efficiency, cost saving and future orientation most A titles will only be available for the new consoles.

What would be the marketing slogan for games on old consoles anyway? "Hey.. we've managed to make it run on the old machine! It may not look as pretty but there you go!" A titles will be marketed as the coolest new thing with the shiniest graphics and you just can't do that with old hardware.

So no.. any CEO who knows his job will not approve big games for old hardware if he can help it. The customer bases will automatically increase while support for the old generation will slowly fade out and if he plans for the game to stick around for a while via DLCs or a long term plan it would even be foolish to start on outdated hardware.

So no.. any CEO who knows his job will not approve big games for old hardware if he can help it. The customer bases will automatically increase while support for the old generation will slowly fade out and if he plans for the game to stick around for a while via DLCs or a long term plan it would even be foolish to start on outdated hardware.

Because of the large install base. The last big name game on the PS2, Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Summoner 2, came out in 2008 in Japan and 2009 in North America. This is the case for all successful systems.

Your "whatever" shows me that you have little understanding of programming at all and equally little understanding of the differences between the machines.

Especially the case with Playstation 3 and 4 is different as both machines run on totally different architectures meaning that basically you need to program them differently and it's not a little tweak like you assume like adding a high resolution pack.

Yes.. initially the customer base for next gen machines will naturally be smaller and there will still be games for the old console for years to come but i guess given the need for efficiency, cost saving and future orientation most A titles will only be available for the new consoles.

What would be the marketing slogan for games on old consoles anyway? "Hey.. we've managed to make it run on the old machine! It may not look as pretty but there you go!" A titles will be marketed as the coolest new thing with the shiniest graphics and you just can't do that with old hardware.

So no.. any CEO who knows his job will not approve big games for old hardware if he can help it. The customer bases will automatically increase while support for the old generation will slowly fade out and if he plans for the game to stick around for a while via DLCs or a long term plan it would even be foolish to start on outdated hardware.

I'm not going to claim to be an expert on game development but I am aware that multi-platform development tools exist. The difference between the PS3 and PS4 architecture are probably no more than between the PS3 and Xbox 360 yet games are routinely developed for or ported between both.

The Wii was outdated hardware when it launched and it sold fine. I don't think the upgraded visuals are going to be the strong selling point you think they are.

Not exclusively but it will be a big marketing factor. The main deciding factor will be the possibilities the consoles offer and how developers use them.

I've played with Kinect a bit but found it too unresponsive and imprecise to truly captivate me but the groundwork was laid. I'll be curious to see the improvements of the 2nd generation and the same applies to the Playstation.

In order to have these high grade add ons work you need new hardware and these may become the factors deciding the race or it will roughly level out again with no decisive winner.

Wii was such a smash hit because of the motion controllers.. have you ever been in a room full of mid 20s and mid 30s people who are having a blast while bowling on a console? That was an eye opener for me and told me that with true mainstream gaming you need innovative ideas to engage people and i believe MS has the upper hand in that with their Kinect system (though Sony tried to catch up).

However having shiny, state of the art HD graphics are a necessity nowadays with the prevalence of HD TVs.. i was kinda disappointed with Halo 4 when i played it on my big TV because developers seemed to have reached the limit of the old generation hardware.

Wii was such a smash hit because of the motion controllers.. have you ever been in a room full of mid 20s and mid 30s people who are having a blast while bowling on a console? That was an eye opener for me and told me that with true mainstream gaming you need innovative ideas to engage people and i believe MS has the upper hand in that with their Kinect system (though Sony tried to catch up).

I agree totally. The Wii's control scheme was obviously its main selling point and Nintendo screwed up by trying to replace that with a large touch screen which doesn't seem to be captivaating people in the same way. Sony has the move but it has always been the "other" controller. By not bundling it with the system and making it the focus it probably wont have the developer support or mass market awareness to really make the PS3 or 4 stand out.

I think MS has a huge opportunity to bundle the next generation Kinect with all new Xbox and drive the perception of a "new" way to play games. Not one that appeals to me all that much. but one that could make the Xbox the Wii of this generation.